Therapeutic Applications Targeting SARM1

ABSTRACT

The present disclosure provides methods for reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in neurons by modulating sterile α/Armadillo/Toll-Interleukin receptor homology domain protein (SARM) activity and/or expression.

CLAIM OF PRIORITY

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/501,111, filed on Jun. 24, 2011, the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference.

FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT

This invention was made with Government support under Grant Nos. R01 NS059991, U54NS065712, and R01NS072248, awarded by the National Institutes of Health. The Government has certain rights in the invention.

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present disclosure relates to compositions and methods for modulating sterile α/Armadillo/Toll-Interleukin receptor homology domain protein (SARM1) for use in the treatment of neurological disorders that manifest and/or include axonal and/or synaptic degradation (e.g., neurodegenerative disorders).

BACKGROUND

Widespread axonal and synaptic degeneration is a hallmark of peripheral neuropathy, brain injury, and neurodegenerative disease. Neurodegeneration and neurodegenerative disorders include progressive structural and/or functional loss of nerve cells or neurons in the peripheral nervous system (PNS) and/or central nervous system (CNS). Axon degeneration has been proposed to be mediated by an active auto-destruction program, akin to apoptotic cell death, however loss of function mutations capable of potently blocking axon self-destruction have not been described.

Axons have traditionally been thought to be strictly dependent upon the cell body for survival, as axons robustly degenerate upon separation from the soma (Waller, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 140, 423 (1850)). However, this notion was directly challenged by the identification of the slow Wallerian degeneration (Wld^(S)) mutant mouse in which the distal portion of severed axons remained morphologically intact for 2-3 weeks after axotomy (Lunn et al., Eur J Neurosci 1, 27 (1989); Glass et al., J Neurocytol 22, 311 (1993)). The remarkable long-term survival of severed axons in the Wld^(S) mouse also raised the intriguing possibility that Wallerian degeneration is driven by an active molecular program akin to apoptotic cell death signaling (Raff et al., Science 296, 868 (2002); Coleman and Perry, Trends Neurosci 25, 532 (2002)). However numerous studies have demonstrated that Wld^(S) is a gain-of-function mutation that results in the neuronal overexpression of a chimeric fusion protein containing the NAD⁺ biosynthetic enzyme Nmnat1 (Mack et al., Nat Neurosci 4, 1199 (2001); Coleman and Freeman, Annu Rev Neurosci 33, 245 (2010)). As such, the Wld^(S) phenotype may be unrelated to normal Nmnat1 function and NAD⁺metabolism, despite its ability to inhibit endogenous axon death pathways. Wallerian degeneration appears to be molecularly distinct from apoptosis since potent genetic or chemical inhibitors of cell death (Deckwerth and Johnson, Jr., Dev Biol 165, 63 (1994); Finn et al., J Neurosci 20, 1333 (2000); Whitmore et al., Cell Death Differ 10, 260 (2003)) or the ubiquitin proteasome pathway (Zhai et al., Neuron 39, 217 (2003); Hoopfer et al., Neuron 50, 883 (2006)) do not block Wallerian degeneration. Mutants reported to affect Wallerian degeneration, such as wnd/DLK, delay the clearance of degenerating axons in Drosophila for only ˜1-2 days, and mouse axons for several hours (Miller et al., Nat Neurosci 12, 387 (2009))—an extremely weak degree of suppression when compared to Wld^(S). Thus the existence of axon death pathways has remained only speculative. Compositions and methods for treating neurodegeneration and neurodegenerative disorders in the PNS and CNS are needed.

SUMMARY

The present disclosure provides compositions and methods related to the modulation (e.g., inhibition) of SARM expression and/or activity for the treatment of neurodegeneration that manifests and/or includes axonal and/or synaptic degradation in a subject.

In some aspects, the disclosure provides methods for reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in a neuron. Such methods can include selecting, providing, or obtaining a neuron with, undergoing, or at risk for axonal and/or synaptic degradation, and contacting or treating the neuron with an effective amount of a composition that inhibits sterile α/Armadillo/Toll-Interleukin receptor homology domain protein (SARM) activity and/or expression for a time sufficient to inhibit SARM activity and/or expression, thereby reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the neuron. In some embodiments, these methods are performed in vitro. In other embodiments, the methods are performed in vivo.

In other aspects, the disclosure provides methods for reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in a subject with or at risk for developing axonal and/or synaptic degradation, for example, in the central and/or peripheral nervous system. Such methods can include selecting a subject with or at risk for developing axonal and/or synaptic degradation, and treating the subject with, or administering to the subject, an effective amount or dose of a composition that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression, thereby reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject. In some embodiments, subjects suitable for treatment can have or be at risk of developing neurodegenerative disease. In addition, such subjects can have or be at risk of developing axonal and/or synaptic degradation is in the central and/or peripheral nervous system. In some embodiments, a subject with or at risk of developing axonal and/or synaptic degradation can have diabetes and/or diabetic neuropathy (e.g., peripheral neuropathy). Alternatively or in addition, the subject can be scheduled to receive chemotherapy, undergoing chemotherapy, and or have previously had chemotherapy.

In further aspects, the disclosure includes methods for identifying compounds that inhibit SARM activity and/or expression. Such methods can include providing or obtaining a sample containing SARM, contacting the sample or SARM with a compound (e.g., a test compound), and determining whether the test compound interacts with or binds to SARM, wherein a compound that interacts or binds with SARM is a candidate compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression. In some embodiments, such methods are performed entirely or partially in silico or bioinformatically, e.g., via modeling. In other instances, the methods are performed in vitro. For example, SARM (e.g., isolated SARM, portions or SARM, or isolated SARM domains) are physically contacted with the test compound. Either way, the methods can include determining whether the compound interacts with or binds to SARM directly, e.g., by assessing the interaction of SARM and the compound in the absence of other components. Alternatively or in addition, the methods can include determining whether the compound interacts with or binds to SARM indirectly, for example, using a component in addition to SARM and the test compound, wherein the additional component binds to SARM in the absence of the compound, and wherein this binding of the compound to SARM is reduced by a test compound that also binds to SARM.

In yet further aspects, the disclosure includes methods for identifying compounds that inhibit SARM activity and/or expression that involve providing or obtaining a sample containing SARM, contacting the sample containing SARM with a test compound, and measuring the transcriptional activity of SARM, wherein a decrease in the transcriptional activity of SARM in the presence of the compound indicates that the compound is a candidate compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression. Measuring the transcriptional activity of SARM can include measuring SARM transcriptional activity (e.g., using a genetic reporter construct containing a SARM promoter, or a biologically active portion of a SARM promoter, operably linked to a reporter, such as a nucleic acid sequence encoding a detectable protein (e.g., a fluorescent protein (e.g., green fluorescent protein) or an enzyme, such as luciferase (e.g., firefly luciferase)). Such methods can be high-throughput.

In additional aspects, the disclosure includes methods for identifying compounds that inhibit SARM activity and/or expression that involve contacting or treating a neuron (e.g., a cultured neuron) with a candidate compound identified via the in silico or in vitro methods disclosed herein, e.g., to confirm that the candidate compound reduces axonal and/or synaptic degradation in injured neurons. In other embodiments, compounds applied in such methods are not first identified via the in silico or in vitro methods disclosed herein. Either way, the methods can include injuring the neuron, for example, by axotomizing the neuron, and determining whether axonal and/or synaptic degradation is altered in the presence of the candidate compound relative to axonal degradation in the absence of the compound, wherein a decrease in axonal and/or synaptic degradation indicates that the candidate compound is a compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression. In some embodiments, the neuron is contacted or treated with the compound before injury. In other embodiments, the neuron is contacted or treated with the compound after injury.

In other aspects, the disclosure includes administering a compound to an animal model of neurodegenerative disease to allow assessment or verification of whether the compound can be used to treat neurodegenerative disease and/or whether the compound inhibits SARM activity and/or expression in the animal model.

Any of the methods for identifying compounds that modulate SARM can include, where appropriate, conducting control experiments to confirm positive observation and/or to identify and/or exclude false positives.

Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention belongs. Methods and materials are described herein for use in the present invention; other, suitable methods and materials known in the art can also be used. The materials, methods, and examples are illustrative only and not intended to be limiting. All publications, patent applications, patents, sequences, database entries, and other references mentioned herein are incorporated by reference in their entirety. In case of conflict, the present specification, including definitions, will control.

Other features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the following detailed description and figures, and from the claims.

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIGS. 1A-I. Identification of three mutations that suppress Wallerian degeneration in vivo. A. ORN MARCM clones in control, l(3)896, l(3)4621, and l(3)4705. Right, axotomy; left, uninjured control. Boxed regions are enlarged at right. n≧15. B. Control and l(3)896 brains 30 days after injury. n≧10. C. l(3)896 clones 50 days after injury. n=11. D. Control ORN MARCM clones labeled with UAS-nSyb::GFP, uninjured (top) and 30 days after axotomy (bottom). n≧15. E. l(3)896 MARCM clones labeled with UAS-nSyb::GFP, uninjured (top) and 30 days after axotomy (bottom). n≧15. F. MARCM clones in mushroom body (MB) Y neurons in control and l(3)896 backgrounds at the indicated developmental stages. dorsal (d) and medial (m) axonal branches (arrows), and dendrites (circled). n≧15 for all. G. dMP2 neurons with GFP. Ventral views (anterior up) of stage 16 embryos (left) and 1^(st) instar larvae. dMP2 neurons before (arrows) and after (arrowheads) segement-specific apoptosis. n≧20 at each time point. H. Wild type and l(3)896 mutant clones with (right) or without (left) ectopic expression of hid. n≧20. I. Wild type and l(3)896 mutant clones in the eye-antennal disc of 3^(rd) instar larvae. Homozygous mutant clones are labeled as GFP-negative (circled). Red, TUNEL staining n≧10.

FIGS. 2A-D. Mutations in dsarm block Wallerian degeneration A. The lethality of l(3)896, l(3)4621, and l(3)4705 was mapped to region 66B. B. The locations of the point mutations in dsarm that block axon degeneration and their corresponding resulting protein change. C. Dsarm protein domains, positions and effect of predicted point mutations. D. UAS-dsarm in l(3)896 mutant clones or a dsarm⁺ BAC rescue axonal degeneration defects in l(3)896/l(3)4621 animals. n=12.

FIGS. 3A-H. Sarm1 −/− primary cultures are protected from Wallerian degeneration but not NGF withdrawal-induced axonal degeneration. A. Phase contrast images of SCG explant cultures from wild type (top), Sarm −/− (middle), and Wld^(S) expressing (bottom) animals at the indicated time after axotomy. B. Quantification from A. Mean±SEM, *p<0.01. C. Axon preservation at the indicated time points in cortical neuron cultures from E16.5 mouse embryos. a-Tau, red. D. Quantification from C. Mean±SEM, *p<0.01. E. Axon preservation at the indicated time points in DRG cultures from E13.5 mouse embryos. a-TUJI, green. F. Quantification from E. Mean±SEM, *p<0.01. G. DRG explant cultures from E13.5 mouse embryos after NGF withdrawal at the indicated time points. a-TUJI, green. H. Quantification from G Mean±SEM, *p<0.01.

FIGS. 4A-F. Sarm1 is required for Wallerian degeneration in mice in vivo A. Sciatic nerve distal to the injury site stained with Toludine blue. Time points and genotypes as indicated. B. Ultra-structural analysis of Sarm +/− and Sarm −/− axons before or 14 days after axotomy. my, myelin; nf, neurofilaments, m, mitochondrion. C. NMJ preservation at tibialis anterior muscles. red, AChR (post synapse/muscle); green, NF-M/synpatophysin (presynapse). D. Immunoblot analysis of distal injured nerve segment. n=4 at each timepoint and genotype. E. Quantification from A. n=5 for all. (p=0.0002) F. Quantification from C. n>200 synapses for each genotype and time point.

FIGS. 5A-B. Crossing schemes for EMS mutant lines and generating MARCM lines for screening A. Crossing scheme for generating a collection of ˜2000 mutant stocks, each with a unique EMS-mutagenized third chromosome containing FRT sites on each arm. B. Scheme for generating MARCM clones and screening mutants for phenotypes in OR22a-positive neurons using ey-flp.

FIGS. 6A-B. Sarm1 knockout mice are protected from axon degeneration after sciatic nerve lesion in vivo Right sciatic nerves were lesioned in 6-8 week old Sarm1 −/− or Sarm1 +/+ mice. A. Transected nerves were stained for neurofilament-M as a marker of structure integrity of the injured axon at the indicated time points. n=4 mice for all. Values are presented as mean±SEM, *p<0.01. B. Macrophage/monocyte infiltration into transected nerves was assayed by staining for CD11b (macrophages) and DAPI (all cells) at the indicated time points after lesion. n=4 mice for all. Values are presented as mean±SEM, *p<0.01.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The present disclosure is based, inter alia, on the surprising discovery that the Drosophila Toll receptor adaptor dSarm (sterile α/Armadillo/Toll-Interleukin receptor homology domain protein) promotes axon destruction, and that loss of dSarm function can cell-autonomously suppress the degeneration of severed axons for the lifespan of the fly. Pro-degenerative Sarm1 function is conserved in mice, where transected Sarm1 null axons exhibit remarkable long-term survival both in vivo and in vitro. Neurons undergoing axonal and/or synaptic degradation (e.g., a process known as Wallerian degeneration) benefit from the modulation (e.g., inhibition) of Sterile α and HEAT/Armadillo Motifs Containing Protein (SARM, also commonly referred to in the art as MyD88-5) expression and/or function. Specifically, injured neurons show reduced axonal and synaptic degradation (e.g., Wallerian degeneration) following injury (axotomy) when SARM is reduced in the neuron. Furthermore, Wallerian degeneration in injured neurons was apparently halted in injured neurons leading to axonal and/or synaptic repair. Accordingly, the present disclosure provides compositions and methods for treating a subject with or at risk of a neurological disorder that manifests and/or includes axonal and/or synaptic degradation (e.g., Wallerian degeneration) by targeting and thereby modulating (e.g., inhibiting) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.

Data leading to the present disclosure includes generation and functional analysis of four distinct loss-of-function genetic mutations that maintain, improve, or enhance the structure and/or function of axons and/or synapses post axonal injury in Drospophila. As shown herein, each of the four mutations map to the Drosophila homologue of mammalian SARM (SARM1), dSARM.

dSarm is reportedly most similar to mammalian SARM, SARM1 (Mink et al., Genomics, 74:234-244, 2001). A single SARM gene has been identified in Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila, mouse, and human and its sequence is conserved among these species. SARM is generally functionally associated with the host immune response. Specifically, SARM is reported to be negative regulator of Toll receptor signaling (O'Neil et al., Trends Immunol., 24:286-290, 2003). Reports also describe a functional role of SARM in the regulation of neuronal survival/death. For example, murine SARM is reportedly predominantly expressed in neurons and is involved in the regulation of neuronal death in response to oxygen glucose deprivation and exposure of neurons to the Parkinsonian neurotoxin 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) (Kim et al., JEM, 204: 2063-2074, 2007 and Kim et al., Abstract from the To112008 meeting conducted in Lisbon, Portugal from Sep. 24-27, 2008, entitled Distinctive role of MyD88-5 (SARM) in neurodegeneration and host defense). A role for SARM has also been described in neuronal development (Yuan et al., J. Immunol., 184:6874-6881, 2010). Reviews on this subject are available (see, e.g., Dalod, Science Signaling, 417:1-3, 2007).

Compositions and Methods for Modulating SARM

The disclosure includes compositions and methods for modulating (e.g., inhibiting) SARM expression (e.g., protein and/or nucleic acid (mRNA) expression) and/or activity (e.g., protein activity). Such compositions and methods generally include targeting (e.g., specifically targeting) SARM DNA, mRNA, and/or protein to thereby modulate (e.g., inhibit) SARM mRNA and/or protein expression and/or function. In some instances, targeting (e.g., specifically targeting) SARM can include targeting (e.g., specifically targeting) SARM in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite. SARM can additionally be targeted in non-neuronal cells, including cells of the immune system, as long as SARM is targeted in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite.

SARM included in the present disclosure includes C. elegans, Drosophila, and mammalian (e.g., mouse and human (e.g., SARM1)) SARM DNA, mRNA, and/or protein, including full length transcripts and proteins, truncated transcripts and proteins (e.g., truncated SARM transcripts and proteins that exhibit or have detectable SARM activity), and/or mutant or mutated SARM transcripts and protein, truncated or otherwise (e.g., that exhibit or have detectable SARM activity). The term SARM also refers to and includes synonyms of SARM (synonyms can be viewed at, e.g., ihop-net.org).

In some instances, SARM can include SEQ ID NO:1 (human SARM1 mRNA (national center for biotechnology information (NCBI) accession number NM_(—)015077 (NM_(—)015077.2)); SEQ ID NO:2 (human SARM1 protein (NCBI accession number NP_(—)055892 (NP_(—)055892.2)); SEQ ID NO:3 (murine SARM1 mRNA, isoform 1 (NCBI accession number NM_(—)001168521 (NM_(—)001168521.1)); SEQ ID NO:4 (murine SARM1 protein, isoform 1 (NCBI accession number NP_(—)001161993 (NP_(—)001161993.1)); SEQ ID NO:5 (murine SARM1 mRNA, isoform 2 (NCBI accession number NM_(—)172795 (NM_(—)172795.3)); and/or SEQ ID NO:6 (murine SARM1 protein, isoform 2 (NCBI accession number NP_(—)766383 (NP_(—)766383.2)). Accordingly, the present disclosure provides compositions and methods for treating a subject with or at risk of a neurological disorder that manifests and/or includes axonal and/or synaptic degradation by targeting (e.g., specifically targeting) one or more of SEQ ID NOs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and/or 6 in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite, thereby modulating (e.g., inhibiting) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.

SARM can also include SARM-like nucleic acid and amino acid sequences with certain percent identity to SEQ ID NOs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and/or 6. Suitable identity can include, for example, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 85%, 90%, 95%, 98%, 99%, and 100% identity between SEQ ID NOs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and/or 6 and the SARM-like sequence.

Methods for determining percent identity between nucleic acid and amino acid sequences are known in the art. For example, the sequences are aligned for optimal comparison purposes (e.g., gaps can be introduced in one or both of a first and a second amino acid or nucleic acid sequence for optimal alignment and non-homologous sequences can be disregarded for comparison purposes). In a preferred embodiment, the length of a reference sequence aligned for comparison purposes is at least 30%, preferably at least 40%, more preferably at least 50%, even more preferably at least 60%, and even more preferably at least 70%, 80%, 90%, or 100% of the length of the reference sequence. The amino acid residues or nucleotides at corresponding amino acid positions or nucleotide positions are then compared. When a position in the first sequence is occupied by the same amino acid residue or nucleotide as the corresponding position in the second sequence, then the molecules are identical at that position. The determination of percent identity between two amino acid sequences is accomplished using the BLAST 2.0 program. Sequence comparison is performed using an ungapped alignment and using the default parameters (Blossom 62 matrix, gap existence cost of 11, per residue gapped cost of 1, and a lambda ratio of 0.85). The mathematical algorithm used in BLAST programs is described in Altschul et al. (Nucleic Acids Res. 25:3389-3402, 1997).

Compositions for modulating SARM expression and/or activity can include, but are not limited to, one or more of: small molecules, inhibitory nucleic acids, antibodies, and inhibitory peptides. For example, one or more of a small molecule, an inhibitory nucleic acid, an anti-SARM antibody, and/or an inhibitory nucleic acid can be used to target (e.g., specifically target) SARM (e.g., SEQ ID NOs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and/or 6) in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite, thereby modulating (e.g., inhibiting) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.

Small Molecules

Suitable small molecules include small molecules that inhibit SARM expression and/or activity directly, indirectly, or both directly and indirectly. Suitable small molecules include small molecules that bind (e.g., bind specifically) to SARM and thereby inhibit SARM expression and/or activity, and/or small molecules that do not bind to SARM or that bind to SARM with low affinity, but that inhibit SARM expression and/or activity by binding to a component of the SARM signaling pathway upstream or downstream of SARM.

Inhibitory Nucleic Acids

Inhibitory Nucleic Acids suitable for use in the methods described herein include inhibitory nucleic acids that bind (e.g., bind specifically) to SARM. Also encompassed are inhibitory nucleic acids that bind (e.g., bind specifically) to a component of the SARM signaling pathway upstream or downstream of SARM. Exemplary inhibitory nucleic acids include, but are not limited to, siRNA and antisense nucleic acids. For example, the disclosure includes siRNA and antisense nucleic acids that target or bind (e.g., specifically target or specifically bind) to SARM mRNA (e.g., SEQ ID NOs: 1, 3, and/or 5 and/or a nucleic acid sequence encoding SEQ ID NOs: 2, 4, or 6) in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite, thereby modulating (e.g., inhibiting) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.

RNAi is a process whereby double-stranded RNA (dsRNA, also referred to herein as siRNAs or ds siRNAs, for double-stranded small interfering RNAs,) induces the sequence-specific degradation of homologous mRNA in animals and plant cells (Hutvagner and Zamore, Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.: 12, 225-232 (2002); Sharp, Genes Dev., 15:485-490 (2001)). In mammalian cells, RNAi can be triggered by 21-nucleotide (nt) duplexes of small interfering RNA (siRNA) (Chiu et al, Mol. Cell. 10:549-561 (2002); Elbashir et al, Nature 411 :494-498 (2001)), or by micro-RNAs (miRNA), functional small-hairpin RNA (shRNA), or other dsRNAs which are expressed in vivo using DNA templates with RNA polymerase III promoters (Zeng et al, Mol. Cell 9: 1327-1333 (2002); Paddison et al, Genes Dev. 16:948-958 (2002); Lee et al, Nature Biotechnol. 20:500-505 (2002); Paul et al, Nature Biotechnol. 20:505-508 (2002); Tuschl, T., Nature Biotechnol. 20:440-448 (2002); Yu et al, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99(9):6047-6052 (2002); McManus et al, RNA 8:842-850 (2002); Sui et al, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99(6):5515-5520 (2002)).

RNAi useful for inhibiting SARM can include dsRNA molecules comprising 16-30, e.g., 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, or 30 nucleotides in each strand, wherein one of the strands is substantially identical, e.g., at least 80% (or more, e.g., 85%, 90%, 95%, or 100%) identical, e.g., having 3, 2, 1, or 0 mismatched nucleotide(s), to a target region in the mRNA, and the other strand is complementary to the first strand. The dsRNA molecules can be chemically synthesized, or can be transcribed in vitro from a DNA template, or in vivo from, e.g., shRNA. The dsRNA molecules can be designed using any method known in the art; a number of algorithms are known, and are commercially available. Gene walk methods can be used to optimize the inhibitory activity of the siRNA Inhibitory nucleic acids can include both siRNA and modified siRNA derivatives, e.g., siRNAs modified to alter a property such as the pharmacokinetics of the composition, for example, to increase half-life in the body, as well as engineered RNAi precursors.

siRNA can be delivered into cells by methods known in the art, e.g., cationic liposome transfection and electroporation. Direct delivery of siRNA in saline or other excipients can silence target genes in tissues, such as the eye, lung, and central nervous system (Bitko et al., Nat. Med. 11:50-55 (2005); Shen et al., Gene Ther. 13:225-234 (2006); Thakker, et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. (2004)). In adult mice, efficient delivery of siRNA can be accomplished by “high-pressure” delivery technique, a rapid injection (within 5 seconds) of a large volume of siRNA containing solution into animal via the tail vein (Liu (1999), supra; McCaffrey (2002), supra; Lewis, Nature Genetics 32:107-108 (2002)). Liposomes and nanoparticles can also be used to deliver siRNA into animals. Delivery methods using liposomes, e.g. stable nucleic acid-lipid particles (SNALPs), dioleoyl phosphatidylcholine (DOPC)-based delivery system, as well as lipoplexes, e.g. Lipofectamine 2000, TransIT-TKO, have been shown to effectively repress target mRNA (de Fougerolles, Human Gene Ther. 19:125-132 (2008); Landen et al., Cancer Res. 65:6910-6918 (2005); Luo et al., Mol. Pain. 1:29 (2005); Zimmermann et al., Nature 441:111-114 (2006)). Conjugating siRNA to peptides, RNA aptamers, antibodies, or polymers, e.g. dynamic polyconjugates, cyclodextrin-based nanoparticles, atelocollagen, and chitosan, can improve siRNA stability and/or uptake. (Howard et al., Mol. Ther. 14:476-484 (2006); Hu-Lieskovan et al., Cancer Res. 65:8984-8992 (2005); Kumar, et al., Nature 448:39-43; McNamara et al., Nat. Biotechnol. 24:1005-1015 (2007); Rozema et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104:12982-12987 (2007); Song et al., Nat. Biotechnol. 23:709-717 (2005); Soutschek (2004), supra; Wolfium et al., Nat. Biotechnol. 25:1149-1157 (2007)). Viral-mediated delivery mechanisms can also be used to induce specific silencing of targeted genes through expression of siRNA, for example, by generating recombinant adenoviruses harboring siRNA under RNA Pol II promoter transcription control (Xia et al. (2002), supra). Infection of HeLa cells by these recombinant adenoviruses allows for diminished endogenous target gene expression. Injection of the recombinant adenovirus vectors into transgenic mice expressing the target genes of the siRNA results in in vivo reduction of target gene expression. Id. In an animal model, whole-embryo electroporation can efficiently deliver synthetic siRNA into post-implantation mouse embryos (Calegari et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99(22):14236-40 (2002)).

siRNA duplexes can be expressed within cells from engineered RNAi precursors, e.g., recombinant DNA constructs using mammalian Pol III promoter systems (e.g., HI or U6/snRNA promoter systems (Tuschl (2002), supra) capable of expressing functional double-stranded siRNAs; (Bagella et al, J. Cell. Physiol. 177:206-213 (1998); Lee et al. (2002), supra; Miyagishi et al. (2002), supra; Paul et al. (2002), supra; Yu et al. (2002), supra; Sui et al. (2002), supra). Transcriptional termination by RNA Pol III occurs at runs of four consecutive T residues in the DNA template, providing a mechanism to end the siRNA transcript at a specific sequence. The siRNA is complementary to the sequence of the target gene in 5′-3′ and 3′-5′ orientations, and the two strands of the siRNA can be expressed in the same construct or in separate constructs. Hairpin siRNAs, driven by HI or U6 snRNA promoter and expressed in cells, can inhibit target gene expression (Bagella et al. (1998), supra; Lee et al. (2002), supra; Miyagishi et al. (2002), supra; Paul et al. (2002), supra; Yu et al. (2002), supra; Sui et al. (2002) supra). Constructs containing siRNA sequence under the control of T7 promoter also make functional siRNAs when cotransfected into the cells with a vector expression T7 RNA polymerase (Jacque (2002), supra).

Synthetic siRNAs can be delivered into cells, e.g., by direct delivery, cationic liposome transfection, and electroporation. However, these exogenous siRNA typically only show short term persistence of the silencing effect (4.about.5 days). Several strategies for expressing siRNA duplexes within cells from recombinant DNA constructs allow longer-term target gene suppression in cells, including mammalian Pol II and III promoter systems (e.g., H1, U1, or U6/snRNA promoter systems (Denti et al. (2004), supra; Tuschl (2002), supra); capable of expressing functional double-stranded siRNAs (Bagella et al., J. Cell. Physiol. 177:206-213 (1998); Lee et al. (2002), supra; Miyagishi et al. (2002), supra; Paul et al. (2002), supra; Scherer et al. (2007), supra; Yu et al. (2002), supra; Sui et al. (2002), supra).

Transcriptional termination by RNA Pol III occurs at runs of four consecutive T residues in the DNA template, providing a mechanism to end the siRNA transcript at a specific sequence. The siRNA is complementary to the sequence of the target gene in 5′-3′ and 3′-5′ orientations, and the two strands of the siRNA can be expressed in the same construct or in separate constructs. Hairpin siRNAs, driven by H1 or U6 snRNA promoter and expressed in cells, can inhibit target gene expression (Bagella et al. (1998), supra; Lee et al. (2002), supra; Miyagishi et al. (2002), supra; Paul et al. (2002), supra; Yu et al. (2002), supra; Sui et al. (2002) supra). Constructs containing siRNA sequence under the control of T7 promoter also make functional siRNAs when cotransfected into the cells with a vector expression T7 RNA polymerase (Jacque (2002), supra).

siRNA can also be expressed in a miRNA backbone which can be transcribed by either RNA Pol II or III. MicroRNAs are endogenous noncoding RNAs of approximately 22 nucleotides in animals and plants that can post-transcriptionally regulate gene expression (Bartel, Cell 116:281-297 (2004); Valencia-Sanchez et al., Genes & Dev. 20:515-524 (2006)). One common feature of miRNAs is that they are excised from an approximately 70 nucleotide precursor RNA stem loop by Dicer, an RNase III enzyme, or a homolog thereof. By substituting the stem sequences of the miRNA precursor with the sequence complementary to the target mRNA, a vector construct can be designed to produce siRNAs to initiate RNAi against specific mRNA targets in mammalian cells. When expressed by DNA vectors containing polymerase II or III promoters, miRNA designed hairpins can silence gene expression (McManus (2002), supra; Zeng (2002), supra).

Engineered RNA precursors, introduced into cells or whole organisms as described herein, will lead to the production of a desired siRNA molecule. Such an siRNA molecule will then associate with endogenous protein components of the RNAi pathway to bind to and target a specific mRNA sequence for cleavage, destabilization, and/or translation inhibition destruction. In this fashion, the mRNA to be targeted by the siRNA generated from the engineered RNA precursor will be depleted from the cell or organism, leading to a decrease in the concentration of the protein encoded by that mRNA in the cell or organism.

An “antisense” nucleic acid can include a nucleotide sequence that is complementary to a “sense” nucleic acid encoding a protein, e.g., complementary to the coding strand of a double-stranded cDNA molecule or complementary to a PKCd mRNA sequence. The antisense nucleic acid can be complementary to an entire coding strand of a target sequence, or to only a portion thereof. In another embodiment, the antisense nucleic acid molecule is antisense to a “noncoding region” of the coding strand of a nucleotide sequence (e.g., the 5′ and 3′ untranslated regions).

An antisense nucleic acid can be designed such that it is complementary to the entire coding region of a target mRNA, but can also be an oligonucleotide that is antisense to only a portion of the coding or noncoding region of the target mRNA. For example, the antisense oligonucleotide can be complementary to the region surrounding the translation start site of the target mRNA, e.g., between the −10 and +10 regions of the target gene nucleotide sequence of interest. An antisense oligonucleotide can be, for example, about 7, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, or more nucleotides in length.

An antisense nucleic acid can be constructed using chemical synthesis and enzymatic ligation reactions using procedures known in the art. For example, an antisense nucleic acid (e.g., an antisense oligonucleotide) can be chemically synthesized using naturally occurring nucleotides or variously modified nucleotides designed to increase the biological stability of the molecules or to increase the physical stability of the duplex formed between the antisense and sense nucleic acids, e.g., phosphorothioate derivatives and acridine substituted nucleotides can be used. The antisense nucleic acid also can be produced biologically using an expression vector into which a nucleic acid has been subcloned in an antisense orientation (i.e., RNA transcribed from the inserted nucleic acid will be of an antisense orientation to a target nucleic acid of interest, described further in the following subsection). Based upon the sequences disclosed herein, one of skill in the art can easily choose and synthesize any of a number of appropriate antisense molecules for use in accordance with the present invention. For example, a “gene walk” comprising a series of oligonucleotides of 15-30 nucleotides spanning the length of a target nucleic acid can be prepared, followed by testing for inhibition of target gene expression. Optionally, gaps of 5-10 nucleotides can be left between the oligonucleotides to reduce the number of oligonucleotides synthesized and tested. Such methods can also be used to identify siRNAs.

In some embodiments, the antisense nucleic acid molecule is a cc-anomeric nucleic acid molecule. A cc-anomeric nucleic acid molecule forms specific double-stranded hybrids with complementary RNA in which, contrary to the usual β-units, the strands run parallel to each other (Gaultier et al., Nucleic Acids. Res. 15:6625-6641 (1987)). The antisense nucleic acid molecule can also comprise a 2′-o-methylribonucleotide (Inoue et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 15:6131-6148 (1987)) or a chimeric RNA-DNA analogue (Inoue et al. FEBS Lett., 215:327-330 (1987)).

In some embodiments, the antisense nucleic acid is a morpholino oligonucleotide (see, e.g., Heasman, Dev. Biol. 243:209-14 (2002); Iversen, Curr. Opin. Mol. Ther. 3:235-8 (2001); Summerton, Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 1489: 141-58 (1999).

Target gene expression can be inhibited by targeting nucleotide sequences complementary to a regulatory region (e.g., promoters and/or enhancers) to form triple helical structures that prevent transcription of the Spt5 gene in target cells. See generally, Helene, Anticancer Drug Des. 6:569-84 (1991); Helene, C. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 660:27-36 (1992); and Maher, Bioassays 14:807-15 (1992). The potential sequences that can be targeted for triple helix formation can be increased by creating a so called “switchback” nucleic acid molecule. Switchback molecules are synthesized in an alternating 5′-3′, 3′-5′ manner, such that they base pair with first one strand of a duplex and then the other, eliminating the necessity for a sizeable stretch of either purines or pyrimidines to be present on one strand of a duplex.

Antisense nucleic acid molecules of the invention can be administered to a subject (e.g., by direct injection at a tissue site), or generated in situ such that they hybridize with or bind to cellular mRNA and/or genomic DNA encoding a target protein to thereby inhibit expression of the protein, e.g., by inhibiting transcription and/or translation. Alternatively, antisense nucleic acid molecules can be modified to target selected cells and then administered systemically. For systemic administration, antisense molecules can be modified such that they specifically bind to receptors or antigens expressed on a selected cell surface, e.g., by linking the antisense nucleic acid molecules to peptides or antibodies that bind to cell surface receptors or antigens. The antisense nucleic acid molecules can also be delivered to cells using the vectors described herein. To achieve sufficient intracellular concentrations of the antisense molecules, vector constructs in which the antisense nucleic acid molecule is placed under the control of a strong pol II or pol III promoter can be used.

Additional information regarding antisense technologies and their use in vivo can be found in Crooke, Antisense Drug Technology: Principles, Strategies and Applications, (CRC Press, 2007).

Locked Nucleic Acids

LNAs comprise ribonucleic acid analogues wherein the ribose ring is “locked” by a methylene bridge between the 2′-oxgygen and the 4′-carbon—i.e., oligonucleotides containing at least one LNA monomer, that is, one 2′-O,4′-C-methylene-β-D-ribofuranosyl nucleotide. LNA bases form standard Watson-Crick base pairs but the locked configuration increases the rate and stability of the basepairing reaction (Jepsen et al., Oligonucleotides, 14, 130-146 (2004)). LNAs also have increased affinity to base pair with RNA as compared to DNA. These properties render LNAs especially useful as probes for fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and comparative genomic hybridization, as knockdown tools for miRNAs, and as antisense oligonucleotides to block mRNA translation.

The LNA molecules can include molecules comprising 10-30, e.g., 12-24, e.g., 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, or 30 nucleotides in each strand, wherein one of the strands is substantially identical, e.g., at least 80% (or more, e.g., 85%, 90%, 95%, or 100%) identical, e.g., having 3, 2, 1, or 0 mismatched nucleotide(s), to a target region in the 1ncRNA. The LNA molecules can be chemically synthesized using methods known in the art.

The LNA molecules can be designed using any method known in the art; a number of algorithms are known, and are commercially available (e.g., on the internet, for example at exiqon.com). See, e.g., You et al., Nuc. Acids. Res. 34:e60 (2006); McTigue et al., Biochemistry 43:5388-405 (2004); and Levin et al., Nuc. Acids. Res. 34:e142 (2006). For example, “gene walk” methods, similar to those used to design antisense oligos, can be used to optimize the inhibitory activity of the LNA; for example, a series of oligonucleotides of 10-30 nucleotides spanning the length of a target 1ncRNA can be prepared, followed by testing for activity. Optionally, gaps, e.g., of 5-10 nucleotides or more, can be left between the LNAs to reduce the number of oligonucleotides synthesized and tested. GC content is preferably between about 30-60%. General guidelines for designing LNAs are known in the art; for example, LNA sequences will bind very tightly to other LNA sequences, so it is preferable to avoid significant complementarity within an LNA. Contiguous runs of three or more Gs or Cs, or more than four LNA residues, should be avoided where possible (for example, it may not be possible with very short (e.g., about 9-10 nt) oligonucleotides). In some embodiments, the LNAs are xylo-LNAs.

In some embodiments, the LNA molecules can be designed to target a specific region of the 1ncRNA. For example, a specific functional region can be targeted, e.g., a region comprising a known RNA localization motif (i.e., a region complementary to the target nucleic acid on which the 1ncRNA acts), or a region comprising a known protein binding region, e.g., a Polycomb (e.g., Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2), comprised of H3K27 methylase EZH2, SUZ12, and EED)) or LSD1/CoREST/REST complex binding region (see, e.g., Tsai et al., Science. 2010 Aug. 6; 329(5992):689-93. Epub 2010 Jul. 8; and Zhao et al., Science. 2008 Oct. 31; 322(5902):750-6). Alternatively or in addition, highly conserved regions can be targeted, e.g., regions identified by aligning sequences from disparate species such as primate (e.g., human) and rodent (e.g., mouse) and looking for regions with high degrees of identity. Percent identity can be determined routinely using basic local alignment search tools (BLAST programs) (Altschul et al., J. Mol. Biol., 1990, 215, 403-410; Zhang and Madden, Genome Res., 1997, 7, 649-656), e.g., using the default parameters.

For additional information regarding LNAs see U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,268,490; 6,734,291; 6,770,748; 6,794,499; 7,034,133; 7,053,207; 7,060,809; 7,084,125; and 7,572,582; and U.S. Pre-Grant Pub. Nos. 20100267018; 20100261175; and 20100035968; Koshkin et al. Tetrahedron 54, 3607-3630 (1998); Obika et al. Tetrahedron Lett. 39, 5401-5404 (1998); Jepsen et al., Oligonucleotides 14:130-146 (2004); Kauppinen et al., Drug Disc. Today 2(3):287-290 (2005); and Ponting et al., Cell 136(4):629-641 (2009), and references cited therein.

Ribozymes

Ribozymes suitable for use in methods encompassed by the present disclosure include ribozymes that recognize and/or cleave SARM and/or components of the SARM signaling pathway upstream or downstream of SARM. For example, the disclosure includes ribozymes that recognize and/or cleave SARM mRNA (e.g., SEQ ID NOs: 1, 3, and/or 5 and/or a nucleic acid sequence encoding SEQ ID NOs: 2, 4, or 6) in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite, thereby modulating (e.g., inhibiting) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.

Ribozymes are a type of RNA that can be engineered to enzymatically cleave and inactivate other RNA targets in a specific, sequence-dependent fashion. By cleaving the target RNA, ribozymes inhibit translation, thus preventing the expression of the target gene. Ribozymes can be chemically synthesized in the laboratory and structurally modified to increase their stability and catalytic activity using methods known in the art. Alternatively, ribozyme genes can be introduced into cells through gene-delivery mechanisms known in the art. A ribozyme having specificity for a target nucleic acid can include one or more sequences complementary to the nucleotide sequence of a cDNA described herein, and a sequence having known catalytic sequence responsible for mRNA cleavage (see U.S. Pat. No. 5,093,246 or Haselhoff and Gerlach Nature 334:585-591 (1988)). For example, a derivative of a Tetrahymena L-19 IVS RNA can be constructed in which the nucleotide sequence of the active site is complementary to the nucleotide sequence to be cleaved in a target mRNA (Cech et al. U.S. Pat. No. 4,987,071; and Cech et al. U.S. Pat. No. 5,116,742). Alternatively, target mRNA can be used to select a catalytic RNA having a specific ribonuclease activity from a pool of RNA molecules (Bartel and Szostak, Science 261: 1411-1418 (1993)).

Aptamers

Aptamers suitable for use in methods encompassed by the present disclosure include aptamers that bind (e.g., bind specifically) to SARM and/or components of the SARM signaling pathway upstream or downstream of SARM. For example, the disclosure includes aptamers that bind (e.g., bind specifically) to SARM amino acid sequences (e.g., SEQ ID NOs: 2, 4, and/or 6) in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite, thereby modulating (e.g., inhibiting) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.

Aptamers are short oligonucleotide sequences which can specifically bind specific proteins. It has been demonstrated that different aptameric sequences can bind specifically to different proteins, for example, the sequence GGNNGG where N=guanosine (G), cytosine (C), adenosine (A) or thymidine (T) binds specifically to thrombin (Bock et al (1992) Nature 355: 564 566 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,582,981 (1996) Toole et al). Methods for selection and preparation of such R A aptamers are known in the art (see, e.g., Famulok, Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 9:324 (1999); Herman and Patel, J. Science 287:820-825 (2000)); Kelly et al, J. Mol. Biol. 256:417 (1996); and Feigon et al, Chem. Biol. 3: 611 (1996)).

Antibodies

The present disclosure also includes methods that include the use or administration of antibodies and antibody fragments that bind (e.g., bind specifically) to SARM (e.g., SEQ ID NOs: 2, 4, and or 6 and/or an epitope presented on native SARM (e.g., SEQ ID NOs: 2, 4, and or 6)) and thereby inhibit SARM activity in a neuron. Antibodies and antibody fragments that bind (e.g., bind specifically) epitopes expressed (e.g., specifically expressed) on the surface of a neuron such that when the epitope is bound by the antibody SARM expression and/or activity is reduced are also included in the present disclosure.

Inhibitory Peptides

Also included in the present disclosure are methods that include the use or administration of inhibitory peptides that bind (e.g., bind specifically) to SARM or interact with SARM and thereby inhibit SARM activity and/or expression in a neuron. Such peptides can bind or interact with an epitope on SARM and/or with a SARM domain. SARM domains that can be bound by inhibitory peptides include, but are not limited to, the alpha helical domain (e.g., including the interacting face of the SARM a helix) and/or the TIR domain. Suitable inhibitory peptides can that bind or interact with SARM can also be used to increase SARM degradation, for example, by increasing ubiquitination and/or proteosomal degradation of SARM.

Antibodies and inhibitory peptides can be modified to facilitate cellular uptake or increase in vivo stability. For example, acylation or PEGylation facilitates cellular uptake, increases bioavailability, increases blood circulation, alters pharmacokinetics, decreases immunogenicity and/or decreases the needed frequency of administration.

Methods for synthesizing suitable peptides are known in the art. For example, the peptides of this invention can be made by chemical synthesis methods, which are well known to the ordinarily skilled artisan. See, for example, Fields et al., Chapter 3 in Synthetic Peptides: A User's Guide, ed. Grant, W.H. Freeman & Co., New York, N.Y., 1992, p. 77. Hence, peptides can be synthesized using the automated Merrifield techniques of solid phase synthesis with the α-NH2 protected by either t-Boc or Fmoc chemistry using side chain protected amino acids on, for example, an Applied Biosystems Peptide Synthesizer Model 430A or 431.

The terms “effective amount” and “effective to treat,” as used herein, refer to an amount or a concentration of one or more compounds or a pharmaceutical composition described herein utilized for a period of time (including acute or chronic administration and periodic or continuous administration) that is effective within the context of its administration for causing an intended effect or physiological outcome.

Effective amounts of one or more compounds or a pharmaceutical composition for use in the present invention include amounts that inhibit SARM expression, levels (e.g., protein levels) and/or activity (e.g., biological activity) in neurons. An effective amount can also include an amount that inhibits or prevents Wallerian degeneration (e.g., axonal and/or synaptic degradation) in a neuron. For example, in the treatment of neurodegeneration, an effective amount of a compound includes a compound in an amount that improves to any degree or arrests any symptom of the disease. A therapeutically effective amount of a compound is not required to cure a disease but will provide a treatment for a disease.

In some embodiments, the present disclosure provides methods for using any one or more of the compositions (indicated below as ‘X’) disclosed herein in the following methods:

Substance X for use as a medicament in the treatment of one or more diseases or conditions disclosed herein (e.g., cancer, referred to in the following examples as ‘Y’). Use of substance X for the manufacture of a medicament for the treatment of Y; and substance X for use in the treatment of Y.

Pharmaceutical Compositions

Pharmaceutical compositions typically include a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. As used herein the language “pharmaceutically acceptable carrier” includes saline, solvents, dispersion media, coatings, antibacterial and antifungal agents, isotonic and absorption delaying agents, and the like, compatible with pharmaceutical administration.

Pharmaceutical compositions are typically formulated to be compatible with its intended route of administration. Examples of routes of administration include systemic and local routes of administration. Exemplary routes include, but are not limited to, parenteral, e.g., intravenous, intradermal, subcutaneous, oral (e.g., inhalation), transdermal (topical), and transmucosal, administration. Methods of formulating suitable pharmaceutical compositions for each of these routes of administration are known in the art, see, e.g., the books in the series Drugs and the Pharmaceutical Sciences: a Series of Textbooks and Monographs (Dekker, N.Y.).

The pharmaceutical compositions can be included in a container, pack, or dispenser together with instructions for administration

Dosage

Effective amounts are discussed above. An effective amount can be administered in one or more administrations, applications or dosages. A therapeutically effective amount of a therapeutic compound (i.e., an effective dosage) depends on the therapeutic compounds selected. The compositions can be administered one from one or more times per day to one or more times per week; including once every other day. The skilled artisan will appreciate that certain factors may influence the dosage and timing required to effectively treat a subject, including but not limited to the severity of the disease or disorder, previous treatments, the general health and/or age of the subject, and other diseases present. Moreover, treatment of a subject with a therapeutically effective amount of the therapeutic compounds described herein can include a single treatment or a series of treatments.

Dosage, toxicity and therapeutic efficacy of the therapeutic compounds can be determined by standard pharmaceutical procedures in cell cultures or experimental animals, e.g., for determining the LD50 (the dose lethal to 50% of the population) and the ED50 (the dose therapeutically effective in 50% of the population). The dose ratio between toxic and therapeutic effects is the therapeutic index and it can be expressed as the ratio LD50/ED50. Compounds which exhibit high therapeutic indices are preferred. While compounds that exhibit toxic side effects may be used, care should be taken to design a delivery system that targets such compounds to the site of affected tissue in order to minimize potential damage to uninfected cells and, thereby, reduce side effects.

The data obtained from cell culture assays and animal studies can be used in formulating a range of dosage for use in humans. The dosage of such compounds lies preferably within a range of circulating concentrations that include the ED50 with little or no toxicity. The dosage may vary within this range depending upon the dosage form employed and the route of administration utilized. For any compound used in the method of the invention, the therapeutically effective dose can be estimated initially from cell culture assays. A dose may be formulated in animal models to achieve a circulating plasma concentration range that includes the IC50 (i.e., the concentration of the test compound which achieves a half-maximal inhibition of symptoms) as determined in cell culture. Such information can be used to more accurately determine useful doses in humans. Levels in plasma may be measured, for example, by high performance liquid chromatography. Pharmaceutical Compositions and Methods of Administration

Methods of Treatment/Personalized Medicine

The disclosure includes methods for treating a subject with or at risk of a neurological disorder that manifests and/or includes axonal and/or synaptic degradation (e.g., Wallerian degeneration) with a composition disclosed herein to target and thereby modulate (e.g., inhibit) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.

As used herein, “treatment” means any manner in which one or more of the symptoms of a disease or disorder disclosed herein are ameliorated or otherwise beneficially altered. As used herein, amelioration of the symptoms of a particular disorder refers to any lessening, whether permanent or temporary, lasting or transient that can be attributed to or associated with treatment by the compositions and methods of the present invention. In some embodiments, treatment can promote or result in, for example, a decrease in the level or rate of axonal and/or synaptic degradation (e.g., Wallerian degeneration) in the subject relative to the level or rate prior to treatment; and/or reductions in one or more symptoms (e.g., a reduction in the severity of the symptoms) associated with the subject's disease in the subject relative to the subject's symptoms prior to treatment.

As mentioned above, neurodegeneration and neurodegenerative disorders include progressive structural and/or functional loss of nerve cells or neurons in the peripheral nervous system (PNS) and/or central nervous system (CNS). Many degenerative diseases or conditions are known to manifest and/or include axonal and/or synaptic degradation (e.g., Wallerian degeneration) and each of these diseases is suitable for treatment using the compositions and methods disclosed herein. Examples of neurodegenerative diseases that can be treated using the compositions and methods disclosed herein include, but are not limited to, the classes of disease: central nervous system (CNS) disorders, peripheral nervous system (PNS) disorders, trauma-related disorders (including trauma to the head, the spine, and/or the PNS), genetic disorders, metabolic and/or endocrine related disorders (e.g., peripheral neuropathy in diabetes), toxin-related disorders (e.g., peripheral neuropathy induced by toxins (including chemotherapeutic agents)), inflammatory disease, exposure to excess vitamin, vitamin deficiency, and cardiovascular-related disorders (e.g., stroke). Examples of these classes include, but are not limited to, the following diseases and/or causes of disease: Huntington's disease, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS)), axonal abnormalities (e.g., Wallerian degeneration), age-related neurodegeneration (including, for example, dementia), dementia pugilistica (or so called ‘punch drunk syndrome”), shaken baby syndrome, spinal cord injuries (including injuries attributable to stretching, bruising, applying pressure, severing, and laceration), peripheral neuropathy disease or trauma, Friedreich's ataxia, Charcot-Marie-Tooth syndrome, diabetic neuropathy, diabetes mellitus, chronic renal failure, porphyria, amyloidosis, liver failure, hypothyroidism, exposure to certain drugs/toxins (including, for example, vincristine, phenytoin, nitrofurantoin, isoniazid, ethyl alcohol, and/or chemotherapeutic agents, organic metals, heavy metals, fluoroquinolone drugs), excess intake of vitamin B6 (pyridoxine), Guillain-Barré syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosis, leprosy, Sjögren's syndrome, Lyme Disease, sarcoidosis, polyglutamine (so called polyQ) diseases, Kennedy disease, Spinocerebellar ataxia Types 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and/or 17, non-polyglutamine diseases, vitamin (e.g., vitamin B12 (cyanocobalamin), vitamin A, vitamin E, vitamin B1 (thiamin)) deficiency, exposure to physical trauma (e.g., exposure to compression, pinching, cutting, projectile injuries (i.e. gunshot wound), shingles, malignant disease, HIV, radiation, and chemotherapy.

The disclosure includes treating subjects with or at risk of diabetic neuropathy with the compositions disclosed herein to target and thereby modulate (e g , inhibit) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject. Diabetic neuropathies are a family of nerve disorders caused by diabetes. About 60 to 70 percent of people with diabetes have some form of neuropathy. The incidence of neuropathy correlates with duration of disease. The highest rates of neuropathy are among people who have had diabetes for at least 25 years. Diabetic neuropathies also appear to be more common in people who have problems controlling their blood glucose, also called blood sugar, as well as those with high levels of blood fat and blood pressure and those who are overweight. Symptoms of diabetic neuropathy can include pain, tingling, or numbness—loss of feeling—in the hands, arms, feet, and legs. Nerve problems can occur in every organ system, including the digestive tract, heart, and sex organs.

The disclosure includes treating subjects scheduled to undergo and/or undergoing chemotherapy with the compositions disclosed herein to target and thereby modulate (e.g., inhibit) SARM (e.g., SARM1) to reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.

Subject Selection

The present disclosure includes selecting a subject for treatment, e.g., a subject with or at risk of a neurological disorder that manifests and/or includes axonal and/or synaptic degradation (e.g., Wallerian degeneration), e.g., a disorder selected from the exemplary list provided above, and administering to the selected subject an effective amount of a composition disclosed herein.

The term “subject” is used throughout the specification to describe an animal, human or non-human, to whom treatment according to the methods of the present invention is provided. Veterinary and non-veterinary applications are contemplated. Subject selection can include diagnosis and/or referral by a physician or other qualified medical profession and self-referral by the subject to be treated. In some instances, methods can include selecting a subject with one or more of the classes of disease disclosed above. Alternatively or in addition, methods can include selecting a subject with one or more of the diseases disclosed above, or selecting a subject that has been exposed to a medical event, an environmental condition or factor, and/or a toxin known to be associated with an increased risk of or development of neurodegenerative disease.

For example, in some instances, methods can include selecting a subject at risk of diabetic neuropathy (e.g., a subject with diabetes mellitus) or a subject with diabetic neuropathy. Methods can also include selecting a subject scheduled to undergo and/or undergoing chemotherapy or treatment with a toxin associated with neurodegeneration. In some embodiments, the subject is in an early stage of disease, e.g., does not have advanced disease associated with complete neuronal death.

In some embodiments, the compositions and methods described herein do not include treatment of a subject with neurodegenerative disease attributable to oxygen and/or glucose deprivation (e.g., stroke) or Parkinson's disease. For example, selecting a subject can include, where appropriate, excluding subjects with neurodegenerative disease attributable to oxygen and/or glucose deprivation (e.g., stroke) or Parkinson's disease. For instance, selecting a subject can include selecting a subject with a neurodegenerative disease and excluding the selected subject if their neurodegenerative disease is associated with stroke or Parkinson's disease.

Treatment

Treatment can include administration of an effective amount of one or more of the compositions disclosed herein to target and thereby modulate (e g , inhibit) SARM in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite. Compositions can be administered by any means that results in inhibition of SARM in a neuron (including in the neuronal cell body), in an axon, in a synapse, and/or in a dendrite. For example, compositions can be administered systemically and/or locally. Systemic administration can include use of compositions that target neurons in the CNS and/or PNS. Local administration can include administration of compositions to a defined region of the CNS and/or PNS, including, but not limited to, an injury site.

Frequency of administration can include once, twice, or more daily administration, for one or more days, and/or for a time that results in treatment of the subject's disease. In some instances, treatment can commence in a subject without neurodegenerative disease or that is at risk for neurodegenerative disease (e.g., in a subject with diabetes but without diabetic neuropathy, and/or in a subject scheduled to be exposed to an agent associated with the onset and/or development of neurodegeneration (e.g., chemotherapy), and/or in a subject that has experienced trauma of the CNS and/or PNS but that does not present symptoms of neurodegenerative disease (e.g., a subject with a head or PNS injury)). Alternatively or in addition, treatment can commence in a subject with neurodegenerative disease. Treatment can include treating a subject without neurodegenerative disease or at risk for neurodegenerative disease, continuing to treat the subject following the onset of neurodegenerative disease, and/or treating a subject that previously had neurodegenerative disease.

Screening Methods

Also included are methods for selecting or identifying compositions, compounds, or agents that modulate (e.g., inhibit) SARM expression and/or activity, for use in the treatment of a neurological disorder that manifests and/or includes axonal and/or synaptic degradation (e.g., Wallerian degeneration), e.g., a disorder selected from the exemplary list provided above. Exemplary compositions can include compositions that interact (e.g., specifically interact) with SARM DNA, mRNA, and/or protein to thereby modulate (e.g., inhibit) SARM mRNA and/or protein expression and/or function. Methods include, for example, screening for candidate compounds using one or more of: in silico, in vitro and/or in culture (e.g., using high-throughput screening methods); and/or animal models (e.g., to test/verify candidate compounds as compounds that inhibit SARM). Compounds can also be evaluated in clinical trial, e.g., for use in human subjects. Techniques for performing such screening methods are known in the art and/or are described herein.

Compounds screened can include, but are not limited to, small molecules, inhibitory nucleic acids, antibodies, and inhibitory peptides. For example, commercial libraries of compounds (e.g., small molecules) can be screened using in vitro high-throughput screening methods. Such libraries include libraries containing compounds (e.g., small molecules) previously approved for use in human subjects (e.g., approved by the Federal Drug Administration).

In silico methods can be used to model the structure of SARM and to predict, model, select, and/or design compounds that interact with SARM or SARM domains (e.g., the SARM a helical domain, the SAM domain, and/or the TIR domain). In vitro methods can include biomolecular (e.g., protein) interaction methods (e.g., using BIARCORE), Fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) in which a SARM binding molecule is used, and/or cellular or genetic reporter assays (e.g., luciferase or fluorescent protein based reporter assays).

Interaction methods can be used to assess the interaction of SARM with a compound or a candidate compound directly or indirectly via competition assay (e.g., wherein a compound or candidate compound competes with a SARM binding partner for SARM binding. In such assays, a decrease in binding of the SARM binding partner to SARM indicates that the compound or the candidate compound interacts with SARM). Such assays can be done in vitro or in cultured cells.

Genetic reporter assays are generally performed in cultured cells. Such assays can be used to screen for compounds that interfere with SARM expression and/or activity directly (e.g., by interaction with SARM) or indirectly (e.g., by interaction with SARM signaling). Useful genetic reporters can include, e.g., SARM (e.g., genetic reporters that include the SARM promoter or a portion thereof operably linked to a genetic reporter protein) and genes that are modulated by SARM (e.g., genetic reporters that include a promoter or portion thereof of a gene that is transcriptionally modulated by SARM). Suitable genes can be up-regulated or down-regulated by SARM. Compounds useful herein can reduce the activity of a gene that is up-regulated by SARM in the absence of the compound. Cell culture methods can also include contacting a neuron with a candidate compound, injuring the neuron by axotomy, and assessing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the neuron post axotomy. Compounds useful herein can reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the neuron post axotomy.

Animal models can be used to assess candidate compounds, e.g., following their identification in silico and/or in vitro. For example, candidate compounds can be administered to an animal that has neurodegenerative disease to determine whether the candidate compound decreases one or more of: axonal and/or synaptic degradation; and/or reduce one or more symptoms of the disease; and/or reduces disease in the animal model, e.g., relative to disease in the animal in the absence of the candidate compound. Candidate compounds that reduce axonal and/or synaptic degradation; reduce one or more symptoms of the disease; and/or reduce disease in the animal model disease are compound that can be used herein. Various animal models are suitable for use in the screening methods disclosed here. For example, ALS mice and HD mice (DiFiglia et al, PNAS, 104(43):17204-9, 2007) can be used.

EXAMPLES

The invention is further described in the following examples, which do not limit the scope of the invention described in the claims.

Experimental Methods

Unless otherwise noted, the following methods were used in the Examples set forth below.

Drosophila Stocks, Transgenics, and Injury Protocol

The following Drosophila strains were used in this study: OR22a-Gal4; dMP2-Gal4 (Miguel-Aliaga and Thor, Development 131, 6093 (2004)); pUAST-mCD8::GFP; pUAST-nSynaptobrevin::GFP; 201y-Gal4; FRT2A/FRT82B; GMR-hid; Ubi-GFP::nls; FRT2A, tub-Gal80; ey-flp; usp² (Tp(3;1)KA21); Ect4-Gal4 (Drosophila Genetic Resource Center); and the 3(L) Deficiency Kit (all from Bloomington Stock Center unless noted). Mutants listed in Table 1 are all from Bloomington Stock Center or generous gifts from: E. Baehrecke; E. Arama; R. Tanguay; M. Guo; N. Tapon; and K. McCall. Lethal mutants were recombined onto a chromosome harboring a flippase recognition target (FRT) sequence and screened using MARCM clonal analysis with ey-flp. To establish mutant stocks for screening, we used the mutagen ethyl methane sulfonate (EMS) and established 2000 individual third chromosome F₂ mutant stocks containing FRT sites on both chromosomal arms (2A and 82B). Antennal injury was induced using a modification of a previously described protocol (MacDonald et al., Neuron 50, 869 (Jun. 15, 2006)). Adult flies were aged for 7 days at 25° C. after ablating the right third antennal segment only. Both antennae were ablated for synaptic preservation studies, as ORNs from each antenna synapse on both glomeruli. Injured flies were aged at 25° C. for the indicated time (7, 30, or 50 days) before dissecting and fixing the brain. Axonal integrity was scored as previously described (MacDonald et al., Neuron 50, 869 (Jun. 15, 2006)); Avery et al., J Cell Biol 184, 501 (Feb. 23, 2009)).

Drosophila Immunohistochemistry

Eye-imaginal discs from third instar larvae were dissected and TUNEL stained using In Situ Cell Death Detection Kit (Roche) as previous described (Klein, Methods Mol Biol 420, 253 (2008)). Embryos expressing dMP2-Gal4, UAS-mCD8::GFP were fixed as previously described (Miguel-Aliaga and Thor, Development 131, 6093 (December, 2004)). 1^(st) instar larvae expressing dMP2-Gal4, UAS-mCD8::GFP were imaged live. Whole brains from either pre-pupae or pupae 18 hrs APF were dissected and staining with anti-FasII as described (Lee and Luo, Trends Neurosci 24, 251 (2001)). Embryos from yw or mutant stocks were fixed and staining with anti-FasII as preciously described. Fas II antibody was used at a 1:10 dilution (Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank). For dsarm rescue experiments, 22aGal4 was recombined with UAS-dsarm using standard fly techniques, and MARCM clones were generated using a line containing ey-flp, UAS-mCD8::GFP. Tdc-Gal4 neurons were imaged using a live fillet preparation (Ataman et al., Neuron 57, 705 (Mar. 13, 2008)). Secondary antibodies were obtained from Jackson Immunolabs and used at 1:200.

Drosophila Confocal Microscopy

Samples were mounted in Vectashield antifade reagent and viewed on a III Everest Spinning disk confocal microscope. The entire antennal lobe was imaged in 0.27 μm steps for each sample for scoring axonal integrity. TUNEL-stained eye-imaginal discs were imaged on a Zeiss LSM5 Pascal confocal microscope.

Drosophila in situs

Standard methods were used for collection, fixation, and immunohistochemistry of Drosophila yw animals. dSARM cDNA corresponding to exon 5 in dsarm transcript RD was PCR-cloned into pCRII (Invitrogen). Digoxigenin-labeled RNA probes were generated according to the manufacturer's instructions (Roche). RNA in situ hybridization to embryos was carried out as described previously (Broadus et al., Nature 391, 792 (Feb. 19, 1998)). Third-instar larvae were decapitated in 1×PBS and fixed in 9% formaldehyde in PBS for 45 mins. Larval heads were hybridized in hybridization buffer (50% formamide, 5×SSC, 5× Denhardts, 250 ug/ml yeast tRNA, 500 ug/ml herring sperm DNA, 50 ug/ml heparin, 2.5 mM EDTA, and 0.1% Tween-20). Adult heads were decapitated on CO₂ and transferred to plastic embedding molds containing Tissue-Tek OCT. The samples were frozen on dry ice, and 15 μm frozen sections were processed for in situ hybridization as previously described (Vosshall et al., Cell 96, 725 (Mar. 5, 1999)), with digoxigenin-labeled riboprobes and detected with TSA-Plus Fluorescein System (Perkin Elmer). Anti-digoxigenin-POD was diluted 1:500 (Roche).

Antibodies and Reagents for Mammalian Studies

Antibodies used in this study were: mouse monoclonal anti-Tau-1 (clone PC1C6, #MAB3420), and rabbit anti-neurofilament-M (#AB 1987) from Millipore; rabbit monoclonal anti-β-tubulin class III (#MRB-435P), and rabbit anti-α-internexin (#PRB-572C) from Covance; mouse monoclonal anti-β-actin (clone AC-15, #A5441) from Sigma; rat monoclonal anti-CD11b (clone M1/70.15, #MCA74EL) from AbD Serotec; rabbit anti-synaptophysin (#08-0130) from Invitrogen. Monoclonal neutralizing antibody against mouse NGF was previously described (Nikolaev et al., Nature 457, 981 (Feb. 19, 2009)). Secondary detecting antibodies conjugated with indicated Alexa dyes, and Alexa-594 conjugated α-bungarotoxin were from Invitrogen. Goat serum, donkey serum, and horseradish-peroxidase conjugated donkey anti-rabbit IgG and donkey anti-mouse IgG were from Jackson ImmunoResearch. All other chemicals were from Sigma unless otherwise specified.

Mouse Surgery and Immunohistochemistry

All surgical and experimental procedures in mice were performed in compliance with the protocols approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of The Rockefeller University, Cornell Weill Medical College, and The University of Massachusetts Medical School. Mice were anesthetized with isoflurane, and the skin on their right hind limb was shaved and prepared with iodine and alcohol. An incision was made between the knee and the hip joint, and the gluteal muscles were separated carefully with a pair of forceps. The sciatic nerve was transected as close to the thigh with a pair of sterile surgical scissors, and 1- to 2-mm of nerve segment was removed to prevent the regeneration of axons into the distal stump. The gluteal muscles were then brought back into their original anatomical position, and the overlying skin was re-approximated by surgical staples or sutures.

For light microscopy, the animals were euthanized at indicated time points post-surgery and nerve segments 3-6 mm distal to the lesion fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde and 2.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M PBS, pH 7.4 (72 h at 4° C.). After an extensive wash in 0.1 M PBS, 2 h of postfixation (1% osmium tetroxide) and dehydration in graded ethanol and propylene oxide, nerve segments were embedded in Durcupan resin (Fluka Chemie). After polymerization for 48 h at 60° C., transverse semithin sections (0.5 μm) were cut on a Leica ultramicrotome, stained with toluidine blue and photomicrographed. To quantify survival, 500 randomly chosen axons were counted. Survival criteria were normal myelin sheaths, uniform axoplasm and intact, unswollen mitochondria. A two-tailed one sample t-test was performed using GraphPad Prism 5.

For the biochemical analysis of sciatic nerves, the animals were euthanized at indicated time points post-surgery. A 10-mm segment of the nerve distal to the transection site was harvested, and immediately homogenized in 200 ul Urea/SDS buffer [50 mM Tris-Cl (pH 6.8), 8.0 M urea, 10% (w/v) SDS, 10 mM sodium EDTA, and 50 mM DTT]. The nerve samples from two Sarm1 +/+ or Sarm1 −/− mice were processed for each time point. After heating at 95° C. for 10 min, 10-ul aliquot of each nerve homogenate was subjected to 4-15% gradient Tris-glycine SDS-PAGE (Bio-Rad), and transferred to Immobilon-P PVDF membranes (Millipore) for immunoblot analysis. The membranes were immunoblotted with the indicated primary antibodies, and then the corresponding secondary antibodies in PBS/Tween-20. The bound antibodies were visualized by SuperSignal chemiluminescence reagents (Pierce). All membranes were exposed to Phoenix Blue X-ray film for 5 to 10 sec.

For immunohistochemistry, the mice were lethally anesthetized at the indicated time points post-surgery, and transcardially perfused with 4% paraformaldehyde/PBS. The sciatic nerves distal to the transection site was dissected, and post-fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde/PBS at 4° C. overnight. After washing three times in PBS, the nerves were cryoprotected in 30% (w/v) sucrose/PBS at 4° C. overnight, and then frozen in the 2:1 mixture of 30% sucrose/PBS:OCT (Tissue Tek) for 12-um longitudinal cryosections. The nerves were permeabilized in 0.5% Triton X-100 /PBS for 1 hour, and blocked in 0.5% Triton X-100/PBS containing 2% bovine serum albumin, and 4% goat serum at 4° C. overnight. Immunohistochemistry was carried out with either rabbit anti-neurofilament-M (1:500) or rat anti-CD11b (1:500) in the same blocking buffer at 4° C. overnight, followed by washing for 1 hour in 0.5% Triton X-100/PBS three times. The sections were then labeled with the corresponding Alexa-488 or Alexa-568 conjugated secondary antibodies for 2 hours, washed in PBS, and mounted in fluoromount-G. Images were taken at 2-mm distal to the transection sites, and 3 nonadjacent sections of each nerve sample were examined. Four (neurofilament-M axons) or three (CD11b macrophages/monocytes) mice of Sarm1 +/+or Sarm1 −/− were included per time point.

To examine denervation at neuromuscular junctions, the tibialis anterior muscles were dissected from perfused animals, and post-fixed in 1% paraformaldehyde/PBS at 4° C. overnight. After washing three times in PBS, muscles were cryoprotected in 30% sucrose/PBS at 4° C. overnight, and embedded in OCT for 80-um longitudinal cryosections. The tissues were permeabilized in 0.5% Triton X-100/PBS for 1 hour, and blocked in 1% Triton X-100/PBS containing 4% bovine serum albumin, and 4% donkey serum at 4° C. overnight. To label axons and neuromuscular junctions, muscles were stained with rabbit anti-neurofilament-M (1:500) and rabbit anti-synaptophysin (1:5) in the same blocking buffer at 4° C. for at least 24 hours. After washing for 1 hour in 0.5% Triton X-100/PBS three times, the muscles were incubated with Alexa-647 conjugated donkey anti-rabbit antibody (1:500) and Alexa-594 conjugated a-bungarotoxin (1:1000) overnight. After washing in PBS for 4 hours, sections were mounted in fluoromount-G, and imaged by LSM 510 laser scanning confocal microscope. To analyze presynaptic structures, maximum-intensity projections of z-stack images from 6 to 8 nonadjacent sections of each muscle sample were generated by AutoQuant X. Partial or full denervation was determined as the postsynaptic AChR sites not apposed by the presynaptic marker (colored in green for better visualization). About 100 neuromuscular junctions were examined for each muscle, and four Sarm1 +/+ or Sarm1 −/− mice were included per time point.

Example 1 Identification of Genes Involved in Axonal Degradation

The Drosophila olfactory system is a model system for Wallerian degeneration. To determine whether Wallerian degeneration might be related to previously described cell destruction programs, a comprehensive screen of existing mutants and dominant negative constructs was performed for Drosophila genes affecting apoptosis, autophagy, or other defined cell degradative pathways, but these failed to suppress Wallerian degeneration in vivo at any level (Table 1).

TABLE 1 Mutations of known cell death and degeneration genes in Drosophila that do not block Wallerian degeneration Gene Mutant Allele Allele Type ask1/pk92B DN OE atg1 Δ3D LOF atg1 KQ #5B OE of DN atg1 68 OE of DN atg1 EP3009 LOF atg1 KG03098 LOF atg1 EP3348 LOF atg2 EP3697 LOF atg6 0.00096 LOF atg7 d77 LOF atg7 d14 LOF atg18 KG03098 LOF bsk/Jnk DN OE bsk/Jnk flp147E LOF buffy H37 LOF calcineurin A1 ED6346 DEF calcineurin A1 BSC749 DEF calx UAS OE CaMKII UAS OE of DN cullin-3 mds1 LOF cullin-3 UAS OE cyt-c d bin1 LOF damm f02209 LOF dark CD4 hypomorph dark CD8 hypomorph debcl E36 LOF debcl W105 truncated 5′ dIAP/thread th1 LOF dIAP/thread UAS OE dIAP2 G2326 OE dredd B118 Null dronc CG OE of DN dronc 51 LOF drp1 KG03815 LOF dunce 1 Null hsp22 EP(3)3247 OE ik2 KAIA OE of DN imd 1 Null mstprox/toll-3 Exel 6146 Def omi/htra2 UAS OE omi/htra2 Δ07 LOF p35 UAS OE pmn UAS OE puckered UAS OE roc1b dc3 LOF sod1 UAS OE strica 4 Null toll-6 ex13 Null toll-7 g1.1 Null tollo 59 Null tor TED UAS of DN All mutants or misexpression constructs were crossed into a background where a subset of ORNs were labeled with GFP (22a-Gal4, UAS-mCD8::GFP). ORN axons were severed, and degeneration was scored 5 days after axotomy. LOF = reported amorphic loss of function allele; OE = overexpression construct (under UAS-promoter control); DN = dominant negative; FL = full length of unmutagenized gene. n ≧ 10 antennal lobes for all.

To identify new genes required to promote axon auto-destruction an F₂ forward genetic screen was performed in Drosophila for mutants that exhibited survival of axons after axotomy (FIG. 5). Because genes required for Wallerian degeneration may cause lethality when mutated, the screen was designed to allow for the isolation of essential and non-essential genes by characterization of both viable and lethal mutants though MARCM clonal analysis (Lee and Luo, Trends Neurosci 24, 251-254 (2001)).

A third chromosome line harboring flipase recombination target (FRT) sites, FRT2A, FRT82B, at the base of both arms of chromosome 3 was used. Methods started with a third chromosome isogenized strain where a subset of olfactory receptor neuron (ORN) axons were labeled with membrane tethered GFP (OR22a-Gal4, UAS-mCD8-GFP), mutagenized with EMS, and established 2500 individual mutant F₂ stocks. If mutant lines were homozygous viable for the third chromosome, unilateral axotomy was induced in homozygotes by ablating the right antenna and assayed. Axonal integrity was assessed one week later via unilateral ablation of antennae. If mutant lines contained lethal mutations on chromosome 3, MARCM clones (Lee and Luo, Trends Neurosci 24, 251-254 (2001)) were generated in ORNs individually for 3R and 3L. Axotomies were performed and analyzed as described for the viable lines.

Axotomy in wild type flies resulted in severed axons being completely cleared from the right antennal lobe within 1 week after injury (FIG. 1A—wild type). In contrast, certain mutants showed normal axon function post-axotomy. Specifically, four lethal lines, 1(3)896, 1(3)4621, 1(3)4705, and 1(3)7152, were identified in which severed axons generated by MARCM remained intact 1 week after axotomy (FIG. 1A). While the number of uninjured axons was slightly reduced in each mutant, 100% of GFP-labeled axons exhibited long-term preservation after injury (Table 2, below). Remarkably, mutant axons remained fully intact 30 days after injury (FIG. 1B) and a significant but reduced number remained morphologically intact even 50 days after injury (FIG. 1C). 1(3)896, 1(3)4621, and 1(3)4705 therefore provide axonal preservation that rivals that of Wlds in Drosophila, and which lasts essentially for the lifespan of the fly. As described in more detail below, intact axons were also observed 30 days and 50 days post axotomy (FIGS. 1B and 1C). Neuroprotection in these mutants extended to synapses: synaptobrevin punctae localized to synaptic terminals even 30 days after axotomy (see below and FIGS. 1D and 1E). In each of these mutants OR22a+ axonal morphology, pathfinding, and innervation of antennal lobe glomeruli appeared normal, suggesting that none of these mutants grossly affected ORN development. All four mutants were homozygous lethal, and failed to complement one another for lethality. Thus each appears to represent an independently isolated lethal mutation in the same gene.

Previous work (9, 10, 12) and the present data argue that Wallerian degeneration is molecularly distinct from apoptosis and developmental neurite pruning. To determine whether 1(3)896 is broadly required for neuron pruning or apoptotic cell death, MARCM clones were examined in Drosophila mushroom body γ neurons, as these neurons undergo both dendritic and axonal pruning during metamorphosis (15). In both control and 1(3)896 animals, mushroom body γ neuron axons and dendrites were pruned normally (FIG. 1F). During normal early embryogenesis, dMP2 neurons are present in each segment, but by late embryogenesis, all but the posterior 3 pairs undergo developmentally-programmed apoptosis (16). dMP2 neurons were generated normally in 1(3)4621 animals, and the appropriate subset of neurons underwent apoptosis (FIG. 1G). Finally, the pro-apoptotic gene hid was expressed in the Drosophila visual system (17) to induce widespread apoptotic death in cells of the developing eye disc. The 1(3)896 mutant clones failed to suppress activation of cell death (FIGS. 1H and 1I).

Example 2 Validation of Axonal Protection for MARCM Clones

To determine the penetrance of axonal protection, MARCM clones were generated in the indicated mutant strains. Axons labeled with OR22aGal4, UAS-mCD8::GFP were aged for 7 days after eclosion, followed by unilateral antennal ablation. Axonal integrity was scored 7 days after injury in both uninjured and injured glomeruli. n≧10 lobes for all. Data is presented in Table 2.

TABLE 2 Production of MARCM clones and persistence of severed axons in axon protective mutant backgrounds Number of Axons Number of Axons 7 days Mosaic chromosome (uninjured)* post axotomy* Wild type 11.08 +/− 1.52  0 l(3)896 4.71 +/− 1.76 5.43 +/− 2.12 l(3)4621 7.44 +/− 0.66 6.13 +/− 0.74 l(3)4705 4.94 +/− 0.85 5.00 +/− 1.61 *Number of individual axon fibers identified in z-stacks from confocal imaging of entire antennal lobe. N = >10.

As shown in Table 2, on average, control chromosomes led to the production of 11.08±1.52 GFP-labeled axons in MARCM clones. In contrast, in 1(3)896, 1(3)4621, and 1(3)4705 backgrounds, 4.71±1.76, 7.44±0.66 and 4.94±0.85 GFP-labeled axons in MARCM clones were observed. The observed consistently reduced number of axons labeled in mutant background indicates that loss of the affected gene's function results in a growth disadvantage for ORNs compared to wild type cells (see the column entitled “uninjured”). However, the number of GFP-labeled axons that exhibit long term survival in each of the mutants is not significantly different from the number labeled prior to injury, indicating in each of these mutant backgrounds essentially 100% of axons were protected 1 week after injury.

Example 3 Duration of Axonal Protection

In Drosophila Wld^(S) expression is sufficient to protect severed axons for 30-40 days after axotomy, but beyond that time point axons degenerate (Avery et al., J. Cell. Biol., 184:501-513, 2009). Axonal integrity was assessed in the mutants described above at 30 and 50 days post axotomy.

As shown in FIGS. 1B-1C, in 1(3)896, 1(3)4705, 1(3)4621, and 1(3)7152 mutant clones axons remained fully intact 30 and 50 days post axotomy. Since Wld^(s)-mediated axon protection disappears by day 50, these mutants exhibit axon protective phenotypes that significantly exceed Wld^(S). Moreover, the median lifespan of Drosophila is ˜30 days, thus severed axons are protected in these mutants for essentially the entire lifespan of the fly.

Example 4 Characterization of MARCM Clones—Identification of dSARM

Two approaches were employed to identify the gene affected in 1(3)896, 1(2)4621, 1(3)4705, and 1(3)7152 mutants. First, lethality was mapped using small chromosomal deficiencies. By assaying for non-complementation it was possible to map the lethality to a single gene, Ect4 (hereafter referred to as dSARM for Drosophila SARM), using an array of partially overlapping deficiencies in the 66B region of chromosome 3 (FIG. 2A).

In addition, next-generation sequencing technology was used to re-sequence the entire genome of each mutant (along with the unmutagenized control line) to an average read depth of 70× in order to identify novel mutations in open reading frames in genes on 3L, and more specifically, any gene mutated in all four mutant backgrounds (Table 3).

TABLE 3 Identification of dsarm through re-sequencing of mutant genomes Any two One mutant lines All three mutant line (maximum # of mutant lines (# of genes) genes) (# of genes) Unique coding variants;  92 (l(3)896) 166 6 genome wide 997 (l(3)46210) 272 (l(3)4705) Unique coding variants;  34 (l(3)896) 8 3 chromosome 3L 132 (l(3)46210)  46 (l(3)4705) + nonsynonymous  17 (l(3)896) 2 1 or splice site and  66 (l(3)46210) heterozygous changes  23 (l(3)4705) The number of identified variants are indicated within and across mutant lines. Filtering strategy was as indicated above.

This approach identified a single gene affected in all of the mutants which resided in cytogenetic region 66B: ect4, which is referred to herein as dsarm (Drosophila sterile alpha and Armadillo motif). The dsarm gene encodes a protein with an Armadillo/HEAT (ARM) domain, two sterile alpha motifs (SAM), and a Toll/Interleukin-1 Receptor homology (TIR) domain. Each identified dsarm allele contained a unique premature stop codon in dsarm open reading frame (FIGS. 2B, 2C).

As illustrated in FIG. 2C, the 1(3)896, 1(2)4621, and 1(3)4705 mutants each contained a unique premature stop codon in dSARM. The predicted protein products from 1(3)896 and 1(2)4705 would be truncated prior to the ARM, SAM, and TIR domains; that from 1(2)4621 would be truncated early in the first SAM domain. 1(3)7152 is a point mutation in the first SAM domain (1986S). These observations confirm that the MARCM mutations are recessive and that three of the four alleles result in premature stop codons. Accordingly, the mutations are loss-of-function mutations.

To test this interpretation, dsarm was cloned for expression studies. The first 630-4828 nucleotides of the partial dsarm cDNA GH07037 (DGRC) was cloned into the pCashsp40-LacZ vector with BglII/XhoI. The remaining sequence was obtained by PCR amplifying a fragment from cDNA IP03452 (DGRC) using 5′ECT4-D NotI (atatatatgcggccgcaaaacATGGGCAATCGTTTGAGCGGC; SEQ ID NO:7) and PM001 (CGTTAGAACGCGGCTACAAT; SEQ ID NO:8), then cut with NotI/BglII and ligated into the pCashsp40-LacZ vector. The resulting full length dsarm was then PCR amplified off the pCashsp40-LacZ vector using the above 5′ECT4-D NotI and 3′ Ect4-D aa1610-1637 (agatactcgagTTACCAAAATATCATGCGCCCGGCATTGGGGGAGGTGGCCTTGGA CAGAATGATGCCCGAAAGTTCCTCGTCCTCCATTTCGTTGTTTTTTATCAGCG AGCGGACCTTCTTCATCG; SEQ ID NO:9), cut with NotI/XhoI, and ligated into pUAST vector (generating pUASt-dsarm). pUASt-dsarm::GFP was generated by cloning into the NotI/SpeI sites of pUASt-CT EGFP with PCR-amplification off the pUASt-dsarm construct using 5′ECT4-D NotI and 3′ ECT4-D SpeI (gatcactagtCCAAAATATCATGCGCCCGGCATTGG; SEQ ID NO:10).

The results were consistent with the above interpretation; expression of full length dsarm cDNA using the postmitotic OR22a-Gal4 driver in l(3)896 mutant clones was sufficient to fully revert the suppression of axonal degeneration observed in dsarm mutants (FIG. 2D). In addition, both the lethality and suppression of Wallerian degeneration phenotypes were rescued in l(3)896/l(3)4621 and l(3)896/Df(3L)BSC795 trans-heterozygous animals with a BAC clone containing the dsarm gene. Together these data indicate that dsarm is necessary in post-mitotic neurons for axonal destruction after axotomy, and loss of dsarm function is sufficient to provide long-term preservation of severed axons.

Based on RNA in situ hyridizations to embryos, larval brains, and adult brains, RT-PCR from dissected neural tissues, and analysis of a dsarm-Gal4 driver line, dsarm appears to be widely expressed in the Drosophila nervous system. This observation suggests that dSarm is broadly required to promote Wallerian degeneration in the nervous system.

Example 5 Functional Characterization of dSARM

A number of cell degradative programs are engaged to dispose of neurons, or parts of neurons including apoptotic cell death pathways and axonal pruning or dendritic pruning programs (Raff et al., Science, 262:695-700, 1993; Luo and O'Leary, Annu Rev. Neurosci., 28:127-156, 2005). Wld^(S) does not block cell death or developmental axon pruning and, reciprocally, molecules that block apoptotic cell death do not block axon degeneration after injury (Simonin et al, Eur. J. Neurosci., 25:2269-2274, 2007; Hoopfer et al., Neuron, 50:883-895, 2006; Finn et al., J. Neurosci., 20:1333-1341, 2000).

To determine whether dSARM mutations were capable of affecting other types of neuronal degradation besides Wallerian degeneration, MARCM clones were generated in Drosophila mushroom body γ neurons using control and dSARM⁸⁹⁶ chromosomes.

MARCM clones were generated with wild type or dSARM⁸⁹⁶ chromosomes during larval stages using the 201Y-Gal4 driver, which labels mushroom body γ neurons. Dendretic and axonal pruning in the dorsal and medial bindles were scored at 0 and 18 hours after puparium formation (APF). As shown in FIG. 1F, in both control (wild type) and dSARM⁸⁹⁶ animals, γ neuron axons and dendrites were fully pruned by 18 hours after pupariaum formation. These data indicate that loss of dSARM function does not affect developmental neurite pruning

The potential role of dSARM in naturally occurring and induced cell death during development was also examined. First, the dMP2-Gal4 driver was crossed into control and dSARM⁴⁶²¹ backgrounds. This marker allows for the unique identification of the dMP2 neurons which are initially generated in each embryonic segment, but later undergo cell death in all segments but A7-9 before the 1st instar larval stage (Miguel-Aliaga and Thor, Development, 131:6093-6105, 2004). As shown in FIG. 1G, dMP2 neurons were generated normally in both control and dSARM⁴⁶²¹ animals and the appropriate subsets underwent cell death prior to larval hatching. Further, the normal complement of dMP2 neurons were identified in stage 16 embryos, and all underwent programmed cell death expect the 3 most posterior abdominal pairs by 1^(st) instar larval stages.

To evaluate the role of dSARM in cell death, cell death was induced in the developing visual system using the GMR-hid approach (Grether et al., Genes Dev., 9:1694-1708, 2005), and made clones of both control and dSARM⁸⁹⁶ chromosomes and assayed for any suppression of cell death (e.g. rescue of eye ablation).

As shown in FIG. 1H, it was found that dSARM mutations had no effect on the activation of cell death in the visual system by hid expression.

These data reveal that dSARM has no effect on the activation or execution of neurite pruning or apoptotic cell death.

In addition, our studies revealed axonal degeneration is not impacted by the loss of known autophagic or apoptotic genes, including the autophagy genes PTEN, TOR, Atg 1, 2, 6, 7, and 18; and the apoptosis genes Cyt C Diap1, Diap2, Debc1 Buffy, Dronc, Roc2, Gft, Cu13, Dark, and p35.

Example 6 Mammalian SARM1 Mediates Wallerian Degeneration

Wallerian degeneration was next assayed in null mutants for the mouse ortholog of dsarm, Sarm1. Five day cultures of superior cervical ganglia (SCG) were cultured from wild type, Sarm1 −/−, and Wld^(S) mice, severed axons, and axonal integrity scored over the next week. Similar experiments were conducted in dorsal root ganglion (DRG) and cortical neuron cultures.

SCG explants were dissected from 0-2 day old pups and cultured as previously described (Gilley and Coleman, PLoS Biol 8, e1000300 (2010)). Axons were allowed to extend for 5 days before separation from the cell body mass using a scalpel. The degeneration of the isolated axons was followed at different time points for 72 h after cut. Bright field images were acquired on a microscope (IX8I; Olympus) coupled to a digital camera (U-TV 0.5XC; Olympus) using AnalySIS software (Soft Imaging Systems GmbH, Germany). Axonal protection was quantified as described (Gilley and Coleman, PLoS Biol 8, e1000300 (2010)). Typically an image of intact axons has a protection index (PI) value around 1. A PI around 0 occurs when axons detach from the dish. A two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to show the difference in axonal protection between wild-type and Sarm−/−. For dissociated SCG cultures, cells were microinjected as previously described (Gilley and Coleman, PLoS Biol 8, e1000300 (January, 2010)) with 50 ng/μl of mito-tagRFP construct created by PCR amplification of the mitochondrial targeting sequence (aa 1-24) of Mus musculus cytochrome c oxidase subunit VIIIb (GenBank AK003116.1) and insertion into the MCS of the pTagRFP-N vector (Evrogen). 24 hours after microinjection cultures were immunostained using 0.3 μg/ml mouse monoclonal anti-SARMI antibody (Chen et al., J Cell Biol 193, 769 (2011)) and Alexa-488 secondary antibody. Cultures were visualized on an Olympus FV1000 point scanning confocal microscope using a 60× 1.35NA apochromat objective.

For cortical neuron cultures, Campenot dividers (Tyler Research) were set up in poly-D-lysine/laminin-coated 2-well chamber culture slides. On DIV 0 (Day In Vitro 0), neocortices were dissected from six E16.5 Sarm1 +/+ or Sarm1 −/− embryos, pooled, and dissociated in Hank's Balanced Salt Solution (withouth Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺, Invitrogen) containing 0.05% (w/v) trypsin/EDTA at 37° C. for 10 min. After adding a final concentration of 10% (v/v) heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (HI-FBS), the tissues were spun down at 500 g for 3 min. The tissues were then suspended and triturated in Neurobasal/B-27 medium [Neurobasal medium supplemented with 2% (v/v) B-27, 2 mM glutamine, 100 U/ml penicillin, and 100 ug/ml streptomycin] containing 10% HI-FBS. The cells were plated in the cell-body compartment of Campenot dividers at a density of 2.5×10⁵ per well. To facilitate the axotomy later, Campenot dividers were removed after 6 hours, when the cells already attached to the slides. From DIV 3, half of the culture medium was replaced every other day by fresh Neurobasal/B-27 medium containing 5 uM 5′-flourouridine and 5 uM uridine to suppress the proliferation of non-neuronal cells. On DIV 10, the cultures were subjected to axotomy.

For the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) cultures, DRGs were dissected from four E13.5 Sarm1 +/+or Sarm1 −/− embryos on DIV 0. The explants from each embryo were individually plated in poly-D-lysine/laminin-coated 4-well chamber culture slides in F-12 /N-3 medium [Ham's F-12 medium supplemented with 40 mM glucose, 4% (v/v) N-3 supplement, and 50 ng/ml mouse NGF]. On DIV 1, the cultures were changed to fresh F-12/N-3 medium containing 1 μM cytosine β-D-arabinofuranoside to suppress the proliferation of non-neuronal cells. On DIV 3, the explants were subjected to either the axotomy, or the NGF deprivation with a final concentration of 50 ug/ml anti-NGF antibody.

To visualize the axons, the cultures were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde (w/v)/phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) at room temperature for 30 min, followed by the permeabilization with 0.1% (v/v) Triton X-100/PBS for 30 min. The axons were then immunostained with the indicated primary antibodies in 0.1% Triton X-100/PBS containing 2% (w/v) bovine serum albumin, and 2% (v/v) goat serum at 4oC overnight, followed by the corresponding Alexa-488 or Alexa-568 conjugated secondary antibodies. To quantify axon degeneration, the images of distal axons were taken from 2 random fields per well, and 40 to 80 singly distinguishable axons in each field were examined, with any sign of fragmentation scored as degeneration. For each time point, 4 wells of Sarm1 +/+ or Sarm1 −/− cortical neuron cultures, or the DRG explants from 4 embryos of Sarm1 +/+ or Sarm1 −/−, were included.

Sarm1 −/− SCG explants exhibited robust protection from degeneration up to 72 hours after axotomy, similar to what is observed with Wld^(S) SCG neurons, while wild type axons degenerated within 8 hours (FIG. 3A,B). This robust protection was also seen in cultured Sarm1 −/− cortical neuron axons (FIG. 3C,D) and dorsal root ganglia (DRG) (FIG. 3E,F). Notably, Sarm1 −/− DRG explants were not protected from nerve growth factor (NGF) deprivation (FIG. 3G,H), a mouse model for developmental axon pruning (4, 15, 18, 19), suggesting that in mammals Sarm1 protection is specific to injury-induced axon degeneration. Thus Sarm1 loss of function robustly suppresses Wallerian degeneration in multiple types of mammalian axons in vitro. In addition, based on use of culture conditions that minimize the presence of satellite cells among the axons, the present data argue that Sarm1 is required cell autonomously for programmed axonal death.

To test whether Sarm1 is required in vivo for Wallerian degeneration, sciatic nerve lesions of the right hind limb were performed in Sarm1 −/− mice and their heterozygous littermate controls. Impressively, while Sarm1 +/− controls exhibited a dramatic breakdown of the axon and myelin sheath within 3 days of injury, 61.2% of lesioned Sarm1 −/− axons were protected from degeneration at least 14 days after injury (p=0.002) (FIG. 4A,E). Analysis of sciatic nerve ultrastructure revealed a remarkable structural preservation at 14 days after axotomy of the Schwann cell and myelin sheath, axonal neurofilaments, and axonal mitochondria (FIG. 4B; FIG. 6A). Western blots of sciatic nerve were performed and probed with antibodies to neurofilament-M (NF-M), α-Internexin, and β-tubulin class III (TUJI). While a dramatic breakdown of these proteins was observed in wild type nerves, they remained largely intact in Sarm1 −/− axons (FIG. 4D). In addition, preservation of the NF-M signal was observed by immunofluorescent staining of the nerve in Sarm1 mutants (FIG. 6A).

Neuromuscular junctions were examined in tibialis anterior muscles after sciatic nerve transection. Synaptic integrity was scored by co-localization of presynaptic marker (NF-M/synaptophysin) with the post-synaptic acetylcholine receptor (AChR). In wild type animals, motor endplate denervation was complete by 2 days after axotomy. However in Sarm1 −/− animals, most synaptic terminals were partially innervated even at 6 days after injury (FIG. 4C,F). Macrophage/monocyte infiltration of lesioned nerves was suppressed in Sarm1 knockout animals (FIG. 6B). Taken together, these results indicate that Sarm1 −/− mutations provide a dramatic preservation of sciatic nerves in vivo from initial axonal cytoskeletal breakdown to recruitment of macrophages for myelin clearance.

Finally, in vivo localization of dSarm and Sarm1 was assayed. To determine the subcellular localization of dSarm, a GFP-tagged version of dSarm (UAS-dSarm-GFP) was generated and expressed via tdc-Gal4 in larval motorneurons. dSarm-GFP localization was assayed in third instar larvae. Axons and cell bodies were identified by co-expression of UAS-mCD-mCherry. Expression of dSarm::GFP in larval neurons resulted in punctate localization in neuronal cell bodies, and broad localization to neurites. Similarly, immunostaining with anti-Sarm1 antibodies of in vitro cultured mammalian neurons showed a broad, punctate pattern in neurites, and endogenous Sarm1 did not show preferential localization with a mitochondrial marker.

References Cited

1. A. Waller, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 140, 423 (1850).

2. E. R. Lunn, V. H. Perry, M. C. Brown, H. Rosen, S. Gordon, Eur J Neurosci 1, 27 (1989).

3. J. D. Glass, T. M. Brushart, E. B. George, J. W. Griffin, J Neurocytol 22, 311 (May, 1993).

4. M. C. Raff, A. V. Whitmore, J. T. Finn, Science 296, 868 (May 3, 2002).

5. M. P. Coleman, V. H. Perry, Trends Neurosci 25, 532 (October, 2002).

6. T. G. Mack et al., Nat Neurosci 4, 1199 (December, 2001).

7. M. P. Coleman, M. R. Freeman, Annu Rev Neurosci 33, 245 (2010).

8. T. L. Deckwerth, E. M. Johnson, Jr., Dev Biol 165, 63 (September, 1994).

9. J. T. Finn et al., J Neurosci 20, 1333 (Feb. 15, 2000).

10. A. V. Whitmore, T. Lindsten, M. C. Raff, C. B. Thompson, Cell Death Differ 10, 260 (February, 2003).

11. Q. Zhai et al., Neuron 39, 217 (Jul. 17, 2003).

12. E. D. Hoopfer et al., Neuron 50, 883 (Jun. 15, 2006).

13. B. R. Miller et al., Nat Neurosci 12, 387 (April, 2009).

14. T. Lee, L. Luo, Trends Neurosci 24, 251 (May, 2001).

15. L. Luo, D. D. O'Leary, Annu Rev Neurosci 28, 127 (2005).

16. I. Miguel-Aliaga, S. Thor, Development 131, 6093 (December, 2004).

17. M. E. Grether, J. M. Abrams, J. Agapite, K. White, H. Steller, Genes Dev 9, 1694 (Jul. 15, 1995).

18. B. L. MacInnis, R. B. Campenot, Mol Cell Neurosci 28, 430 (March, 2005).

19. R. R. Buss, W. Sun, R. W. Oppenheim, Annu Rev Neurosci 29, 1 (2006).

20. M. Mink, B. Fogelgren, K. Olszewski, P. Maroy, K. Csiszar, Genomics 74, 234 (Jun. 1, 2001).

21. Y. Kim et al., J Exp Med 204, 2063 (Sep. 3, 2007).

22. C. F. Chuang, C. I. Bargmann, Genes Dev 19, 270 (Jan. 15, 2005).

23. C. Chang, Y. W. Hsieh, B. J. Lesch, C. I. Bargmann, C. F. Chuang, Development 138, 3509 (August, 2011).

24. E. B. George, J. D. Glass, J. W. Griffin, J Neurosci 15, 6445 (October, 1995).

25. S. A. Barrientos et al., J Neurosci 31, 966 (Jan. 19, 2011).

26. J. M. MacDonald et al., Neuron 50, 869 (Jun. 15, 2006).

27. M. A. Avery, A. E. Sheehan, K. S. Kerr, J. Wang, M. R. Freeman, J Cell Biol 184, 501 (Feb. 23, 2009).

28. T. Klein, Methods Mol Biol 420, 253 (2008).

29. N. H. Patel, Methods Cell Biol 44, 445 (1994).

30. A. Nikolaev, T. McLaughlin, D. D. O'Leary, M. Tessier-Lavigne, Nature 457, 981 (Feb. 19, 2009).

31. J. Gilley, M. P. Coleman, PLoS Biol 8, e1000300 (January, 2010).

OTHER EMBODIMENTS

It is to be understood that while the invention has been described in conjunction with the detailed description thereof, the foregoing description is intended to illustrate and not limit the scope of the invention, which is defined by the scope of the appended claims. Other aspects, advantages, and modifications are within the scope of the following claims. 

1. A method reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in a neuron, the method comprising: selecting a neuron with or at risk for axonal and/or synaptic degradation; and contacting the neuron with an effective amount of a composition that inhibits sterile α/Armadillo/Toll-Interleukin receptor homology domain protein (SARM) activity and/or expression for a time sufficient to inhibit SARM activity and/or expression, thereby reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the neuron.
 2. A method for reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in a subject with or at risk for developing axonal and/or synaptic degradation, the method comprising: selecting a subject with or at risk for developing axonal and/or synaptic degradation; and treating the subject with an effective amount of a composition that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression for a time sufficient to inhibit SARM activity and/or expression, thereby reducing axonal and/or synaptic degradation in the subject.
 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the subject has or is at risk of neurodegenerative disease.
 4. The method of claim 2 or 3, wherein the axonal and/or synaptic degradation is in the central nervous system (CNS) and/or the peripheral nervous system (PNS).
 5. The method of claim 4, wherein the axonal and/or synaptic degradation is in the PNS.
 6. The method of claim 5, wherein the subject has diabetes.
 7. The method of claim 6, wherein the subject has diabetic neuropathy.
 8. The method of claim 5, wherein the subject is scheduled to receive chemotherapy.
 9. The method of claim 5, wherein the subject is receiving chemotherapy or has received chemotherapy.
 10. A method for identifying a compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression, the method comprising: providing SARM; contacting the SARM with a test compound; and determining whether the test compound interacts with or binds to SARM, wherein a test compound that interacts or binds with SARM is a candidate compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression.
 11. The method of claim 10, wherein SARM and the test compound are contacted in silico.
 12. The method of claim 10 or 11, wherein SARM and the test compound are contacted in vitro.
 13. The method of claim 10, wherein determining whether the test compound interacts with or binds to SARM is performed directly.
 14. The method of claim 10, wherein determining whether the test compound interacts with or binds to SARM is performed indirectly.
 15. A method for identifying a compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression, the method comprising: providing a sample comprising SARM; contacting the sample with a compound; and measuring the transcriptional activity of SARM in the sample, wherein a decrease in the transcriptional activity of SARM in the sample in the presence of the compound indicates that the compound is a candidate compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression.
 16. A method for identifying a compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression, the method comprising: contacting a neuron with the candidate compound of claim 10 or claim 15; axotomizing the neuron; and determining whether axonal and/or synaptic degradation is altered in the presence of the candidate compound relative to axonal degradation in the absence of the compound, wherein a decrease in axonal and/or synaptic degradation indicates that the candidate compound is a compound that inhibits SARM activity and/or expression.
 17. The method of claim 16, further comprising: obtaining the compound; administering the compound to an animal model of neurodegenerative disease; and assessing the degenerative disease in the animal in the presence of the compound, wherein a decrease in degenerative disease in the presence of the compound indicates that the compound inhibits SARM activity and/or expression. 